Alternative New Media for the Gulf South
What? No name-calling or Chaucer in his letter to his “friend”, the judge?
Did anyone notice the w3ritign in the letter – Let us get this straight: Abel is the “messenger” directing a letter referring to Judge Ansardi in the third person to – Judge Ansardi.
And Desai has Martin Regan, and two from the Angola Five hearings, Boren and Conner, representing him. Freese and Kinnet represent the Disabled Attorney Connick.
Why the hell would Regan use Abel as a “cut-out” to communicate a message to Judge Ansardi in a manner which looks more like a directive or instruction, not merely FYI??
Why would of the FIVE Counsel involved, not one would communicate with the court but instead use a go-between? Wouldn’t even the least witty jurist have a eye/nose twitch that this doesn’t smell or look right in any event? I realize that one can buy and sell legislators like sacks of potatoes, and damn we have had some dumb ones in Red Stick, but to suttle laterally from one branch to another is definitely one of those FDR “accidents.”
Broussard and Gauthier.
Understood, NotaSurprised – but one expects some more intelligent deviousness.
I have another post coming on the Desai legal Team that should intrigue.
It’s hubris. After doing something for so long and so often, they begin to feel it’s normal and unassailable.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *